Blog

The bill to legalize surrogacy in New York did not get enough support in the Assembly to pass during this session, although the Senate approved it.

The old-school feminist view that surrogacy is exploitive prevailed, for now at least, over the more modern view that surrogacy is among the rights that women should have to make decisions about their own bodies.

“This is a decision that really relied on the feelings of the women in the conference,” Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, D-Bronx, said Wednesday. “And I just think that there are a handful of them not ready. They still want to think more about it, and some of them are opposed.”

Although the bill put many safeguards and regulations in place, and compensated surrogacy has been going on in other states for years without incident, the lobby against it remained unpersuaded.

Governor Cuomo has always been a big supporter of the bill: “I say, how about a woman’s right to choose, which we just argued for Roe v. Wade?” Cuomo said. “But in this state we say the woman must have an attorney, the woman must have a health counselor, the transaction will be supervised under the Department of Health, the woman can’t be in dire economic conditions, but you still believe the woman is not competent to make that decision.”

What does this mean in practical terms for New Yorkers? If you live in New York and want to have a child through gestational surrogacy,

God commanded the first man and woman to “be fruitful and multiply.” Does assisted reproductive technology fulfill that mandate? The New York State Catholic Lobby submitted a memorandum of opposition regarding the Child Parent Security Act, which would make surrogacy legal in New York. A group of 118 Jewish clergy (rabbis and cantors) released a statement in support of it. These opposing attitudes throw into relief the differences between Old and New Testament views of the human relationship to God and what, according to these dogmas, makes an act holy.

Catholicism has been clear and consistent in its position on assisted reproduction technology: it is categorically against it. In vitro fertilization (and third party reproduction) is not really a “cure” for infertility, as would be, for example, surgery to unblock Fallopian tubes. It is a “work around” that sidesteps the sacred procreative act, involving a number of ancillary actions that constitute mortal and venial sins, such as masturbation (required to provide the sperm), adultery (if a donor egg, rather than the intended mother’s egg, is fertilized with the intended father’s sperm) and even murder, with the freezing and possible disuse of any extra embryos (which are considered “persons”). If you believe that life begins at conception, as the Catholic authorities do, then there is intellectual consistency in rejecting assisted reproduction technology completely, despite the sympathy for infertile couples and their sincere desires to have children. If infertility is your own personal truth, you must, as a Catholic, accept it.